Skip to main content

The Great EEOC Roundup: September Edition

 

As always, there are some EEOC cases that jump out at me when I review developments on that front.  Below are a couple EEOC cases and settlements that caught my eye this month.


Lawsuit Filed Against Chipotle for Sexual Harassment & Retaliation

Earlier this month, a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit was filed against Chipotle.  The lawsuit claims that a Tampa location service manager was sexually harassed by a coworker and was unlawfully terminated when a complaint was made.  After the coworker made several suggestive comments to the manager, the conduct escalated to two sexual assaults in one day.  While the prior harassment had already been reported to store management, the manager stated she planned to report the sexual assaults to corporate.  Within three days, the manager was terminated.  This alleged conduct, if true, is in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination based upon sex and retaliation against workers that complain of the discrimination.


EEOC Brings Suit Against Frito-Lay For Alleged Religious Discrimination

Recently, Frito-Lay (a subsidiary of Pepsi) was sued over a claim that it unlawfully discriminated against an employee because of his religion.  According to the lawsuit, the employee was promoted from a warehouse position to a route sales representative role.  This promotion required the employee to undergo training.  After approximately five weeks of training without having to train on Saturdays, Frito-Lay set a training session for him on a Saturday despite being informed that the employee was a Seventh-day Adventist (and therefore could not work on Saturday because of his religious beliefs.)  After the employee did not report for a training session on two Saturdays, he was terminated.  This alleged conduct is in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination against employees based on their religion and requires employees to reasonably accommodate an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs so long as it would not create an undue burden on the employer.


Subway Franchisee Hit With Disability Discrimination Lawsuit

A week ago, a Subway franchisee in Indiana was hit with a disability discrimination lawsuit on the grounds that it unlawfully rejected an applicant that was qualified for the position for which he applied because he was hard of hearing and had a speech impediment.  The lawsuit claims the franchisee cited a “communication concern” due to the applicant’s “hearing” and “speaking.”  This alleged conduct, if true, would be in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act which prohibits discrimination against employees or applicants on the basis of a disability.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more